Attn: bloggers who support the new government guidelines re mamograms
How not to sound condescending or sexist while chiding breast cancer survivors who disagree with you:
1) Acknowledge that there is, and has been, debate and disagreement about the risks vs. benefits of mammograms. Do not assume that women who question this study are unaware of what the risks and benefits are.
2) Do not frame the issue as (rational) doctors vs. (hysterical) women. The panel did not include one single oncologist or radiologist. Many oncologists and radiologists are appalled by the new guidelines; many women AND men with neither scientific background nor personal experience with cancer vociferously support them.
3) Do not assume that we have not read the guidelines.
4) Do not assume that we WANT mammograms. What we want is to live, and for other women in their 30s and 40s to live; we are not convinced the new guidelines achieve that goal. Do NOT say we "want" mammograms because we have been socialized to want our bodies to be invaded.
5) Do not claim that the new guidelines prove that mammograms don't save lives. They explicitly say that 1 out of 1900 women in their 40s who have mammograms survive because of early detection and treatment; they argue that the costs of mammograms for the majority of women who won't develop cancer aren't worth it.
6) Do not claim that the guidelines are scientifically based, while the objections of women are anecdotal and irrational; the guidelines are not based on clinical trials. This is one of the objections that onconlogists have.
7) Do NOT claim that women in their 30s and 40s who are cancer survivors "made the wrong choice" by having chemo or radiation unless you have some evidence to back that up. Do not bring up "slow moving cancers that couldn't kill anyone" without acknoledging a) that this has been known for quite some time and that these can be identified by doctors; and b) recognizing that these types of cancers usually occur in older individuals and that breast cancers in young (20 - 49 years) women are most likely the fast-moving and invasive kind.
8) Do not claim that the guidelines are merely a neutral scientific document that doesn't have real-world implications; according to CNN, they are part of the proposed Senate Health Care Bill: if there is a goverment plan, it will not be covering mammograms for women under 50, and private insurers will no longer be required to cover mammograms for women under 50.
9) Yes, I am aware that Republicans have gleefully begun to parrot concerns brought up by breast cancer survivors and cancer advocacy groups; this does not mean we are lying about our concerns to help the Republican party.
10) Do not assume that support for early screenings for women means opposition to health care reform, a government plan or a single payer plan.
11) Do not bring up other countries' screening guidelines without also mentioning the survival rates for women under 50 with breast cancer in those countries.
12) Do not act as if we are opposed to scientific or political debate if we disagree with you. We DO feel that we have an equal right to participate.
1) Acknowledge that there is, and has been, debate and disagreement about the risks vs. benefits of mammograms. Do not assume that women who question this study are unaware of what the risks and benefits are.
2) Do not frame the issue as (rational) doctors vs. (hysterical) women. The panel did not include one single oncologist or radiologist. Many oncologists and radiologists are appalled by the new guidelines; many women AND men with neither scientific background nor personal experience with cancer vociferously support them.
3) Do not assume that we have not read the guidelines.
4) Do not assume that we WANT mammograms. What we want is to live, and for other women in their 30s and 40s to live; we are not convinced the new guidelines achieve that goal. Do NOT say we "want" mammograms because we have been socialized to want our bodies to be invaded.
5) Do not claim that the new guidelines prove that mammograms don't save lives. They explicitly say that 1 out of 1900 women in their 40s who have mammograms survive because of early detection and treatment; they argue that the costs of mammograms for the majority of women who won't develop cancer aren't worth it.
6) Do not claim that the guidelines are scientifically based, while the objections of women are anecdotal and irrational; the guidelines are not based on clinical trials. This is one of the objections that onconlogists have.
7) Do NOT claim that women in their 30s and 40s who are cancer survivors "made the wrong choice" by having chemo or radiation unless you have some evidence to back that up. Do not bring up "slow moving cancers that couldn't kill anyone" without acknoledging a) that this has been known for quite some time and that these can be identified by doctors; and b) recognizing that these types of cancers usually occur in older individuals and that breast cancers in young (20 - 49 years) women are most likely the fast-moving and invasive kind.
8) Do not claim that the guidelines are merely a neutral scientific document that doesn't have real-world implications; according to CNN, they are part of the proposed Senate Health Care Bill: if there is a goverment plan, it will not be covering mammograms for women under 50, and private insurers will no longer be required to cover mammograms for women under 50.
9) Yes, I am aware that Republicans have gleefully begun to parrot concerns brought up by breast cancer survivors and cancer advocacy groups; this does not mean we are lying about our concerns to help the Republican party.
10) Do not assume that support for early screenings for women means opposition to health care reform, a government plan or a single payer plan.
11) Do not bring up other countries' screening guidelines without also mentioning the survival rates for women under 50 with breast cancer in those countries.
12) Do not act as if we are opposed to scientific or political debate if we disagree with you. We DO feel that we have an equal right to participate.